Month: February 2026

Categories
Blogs Rodoreda

Quimet is a D1 Ragebaiter

I found The Time of the Doves interesting, and I liked Natalia’s narration throughout. I feel like I am slowly but surely overcoming my bias towards the first-person perspective. In fact, in this novel specifically, I believe that only the first person could have made me so infuriated about Quimet. In this blog post, I want to discuss how Rodoreda’s storytelling excels through its symbolism and lively narrative style

 

Quimet irritated me so much throughout the whole book. He was as annoying as the fly constantly buzzing in your ear on a sunny day, or as the fire alarm when it’s on low battery. My rage cannot be condensed into one blog post; as a result, I will focus on Rodoreda’s symbolism regarding Natalia and Quimet. The following quote (65) discusses Quimet’s thoughts about a dove:

 

“Quimet said we should keep [the dove], that he’d make a cage for it on the balcony so we could watch it from the dining room: a cage like a mansion, with an iron balcony, a red roof, and a door with a knocker. And how that dove would be the boy’s pride and joy.”

 

Quimet’s desire to keep the dove in captivity as his “pride and joy” showcased what he thought of Natalia, considering that he calls her Colometa (his little dove) (18).  Perhaps, his infuriating treatment towards Natalia can be explained by him wanting to keep Natalia in his control?

 

Another notable aspect of the novel was the “diary-style” narration, which highlighted the gaps in the storyline. I really liked how Natalia’s raw, unfiltered recounting of events unfolded in each section; her storytelling truly made every scene feel alive and interesting. For example, Natalia’s version of the scene describing the worm’s appearance (which was gross TT) was semi-entertaining. I think this may be attributed to her dismissal of the expected combined with her making connections to common real world things (78):

 

“We’d never seen one. It was the color of spaghetti made without eggs, and we kept it in alcohol in a jam jar.”

 

However, despite the entertaining nature of her journal entries, I found that they left me questioning the “in between.” For example, the jump from her pregnancy announcement to giving birth was extremely abrupt as a significant amount of time had passed between chapter. This brought me to question the nature of such entries: do they only mark special occasions, or are they are just randomly written (such as, whenever Natalia got a moment of rest). All the entries have at least some extent of crazy mixed into them, but a lot of the time it seems like it’s Natalia’s bizarre and lively narration that gives the somewhat mundane stories (more so in the first half of the novel) this appearance. That makes me believe that the novel is a collection of emotionally jarring moments in time, rather than physically exciting. Now, I leave you with the same question: how do you think these specific journal entries were created?

Categories
Arguedas Blogs Inequality

new character unlocked: a middle-class man

To start off this post, I really appreciated how easy the words of this novel was to read; AND ONLY THE WORDS, this book was also a emotionally hard to get through due to the emphasis on the unfortunate discrimination towards marginalized racial and social groups. The descriptions in the book also never overwhelmed me like some of the previous pieces we read, rather, every detail seemed extremely relevant to Arguedas’ world. Despite my categorization of an “easy read,” I had some difficulty focusing on the novel due to the mix of plenty of description AND lots of conversation. After my initial confusion, I realized that the conversations itself with another piece of detail the author was giving us (I know this seems super obvious TT, but I found that the previous novels we read in this course did not use spoken word like this).

 

I would first like to discuss Arguedas’ use of description and imagery and how Arguedas utilizes these literary tools as a lens into his surrounding world. Description is an incredibly effective world-building tool, while imagery seems more effective to explain current events in the novel. The descriptions given in the book, particularly the discrimination indigenous people within and outside of school, gives us insight about the society during Ernesto’s time.

 

It seemed like Ernesto exhibited a lot of character growth over the course of the novel: he realized that financial gain does not amount to ethical and emotional liberty. I thought this shift was strengthened by the following quote that connects such theoretical ideas into reality through him crossing a bridge: “on the hanging bridge at Auquibamba, I crossed over the river in the afternoon” (233).

 

One theme I noticed between all the novels up to this point, is that the main character has consistently been a member of the upper class. Deep Rivers, however, tells the story from a different perspective. We clearly see the levels of social inequality (and power dynamics) in his school, between the Indigenous people, the middle class and upper class students, told from the perspective of a middle class boy.

 

Finally, this novel brought me to question the backgrounds of the authors of the previous novels. Books are often reflections of larger societies and the author. Most novels were written by members of the upper class due to their perceived “larger” amount of free time. As a result, it makes sense for these authors wanting to elucidate their personal experience. However, this also adds a large amount of uncertainty to the books, especially when considering the lack of representation and erasure of the experiences of the broader population. So, I will now leave you with a question:  do you think an upper class author can truly represent the lived experiences of the broader population? Is it actually necessary to discuss the experiences of most of a population?

 

Categories
Blogs Moravia

and the Grammy goes to … Agostino for the most Freudian MC!

This book was unsatisfying in so many ways: the novel felt extremely unfinished by the end due to Agostino’s glaringly evident “mommy issues,” self-centered personality and the lack of character development.

 

Agostino’s Oedipus complex has got to be a primary source for Freud’s central psychoanalytic theory TT. He beings being utterly infatuated with his mother (1-3), and then becomes jealous about Renzo’s relationship with his mother.” Somewhere along the line, this jealousy towards Renzo, manifests into a combination of adoration and hatred towards his mother.

 

Agostino, to me, was a very bland and self-centered main character that lacks any sense of self-awareness. Agostino’s blatant lack of self-awareness became apparent during the scene where he was almost “cosplaying” a boat boy. The following quote: “this small incident left Agostino with the feeling once and for all that he no longer belonged to the world of the children with the soccer ball, and that, anyway, he has sunk so low that he could not live without deceit and vexation” (78) showcases that Agostino believed that he was somewhere between being an elite and member of the working class. However, I would argue that his smugness after receiving his payment showcased how his actions were a cheap caricature of the poverty he was attempting to portray.

 

Agostino exhibits ZERO character development or growth. Firstly, Agostino states that he “want[s] to leave tomorrow” (101) after getting utterly deceived by Tortima. But honestly, can we even call it deceit, rather than naivety? At the start of the novel, a similar occurrence occurred where Berto assaulted Augustino after receiving cigarettes. Since that instance, I would say that none of the group acted any nicer to him, rather he was blind sighted by being “liberated” from his aristocratic world. His final humiliation was nothing but pure foolishness, rather than the deceit he described.

 

Moreover, his skewed perception of his mother as a “woman” or a “mother” that lasted throughout the novel did not get resolved. The main character believed that a woman he saw “had somehow confirmed the mother’s womanhood” (102) however, this revelation is really nothing new, from the start of the novel (1-3) the MC thought about his mother in these ways, just without overtly stating it. This showcases how he is unable to see the fact that “womanhood” and “motherhood” can exist concurrently, and how those terms are more nuanced than the MC’s disgustingly lustful portrayals of women. Therefore, I conclude that Agostino is a stale, privileged character that doesn’t learn from his experiences.

 

I realize that my critique on Agostino’s character development may come out as harsh, which is why I want to ask: do you think the storyline actually progressed enough for Agostino to reflect on himself and grow as a character?

 

Finally, in honor of the Grammy’s occurring right now, Agostino absolutely swept past Proust to get the award for the most Freudian MC (congrats, I guess?). Seriously, if I could summarize Agostino in one word, it would literally be Freud.

Spam prevention powered by Akismet